CGC's Policy on Approving Sig Series Venues and Witnesses, Thoughts?

[jreezy]

 

If people think the program is flawless all they need to do is look back a few months to the Akoni issues. That was a huge mistake on everyone's part, Akonis, CGCs, and his fellow facilitators. Ty Salazar is doing a crazy good job taking care of that mess, but imagine if he hadn't been able to stand up and handle it.

 

More stringent SS rules are better for everyone involved from CGC to collectors, and facilitators alike.

 

The Akoni issues made me lose faith in the signature series program a little bit. I didn't have much invested compared to others, but seeing that mess made me uneasy.

 

I did get a book , not a sig book that he promised, only after filing a paypal claim. After time, I realized that was an isolated issue. As long as I deal with respected sellers/ trusted facilitators going forward I think I will be ok.

 

 

[Buck Biggins]

My thought it is that CGC's role should be to make sure that the sigs are authentic. Having good, honestly witnesses is the best way to achieve that. Why should I care if they are one "paparazzi" style or at a non-convention venue. That doesn't matter in my mind. It should be 100% dependent on authenticity only. Just my 2 cents.

 

There is more to the program than merely authenticity. Professionalism - which includes obtaining sigs at appropriate times in appropriate venues, paying the fees that creators and celebs require, and putting a positive impression in the minds of customers and the talent - is also a factor in maintaining CGC's image as the classiest and most trustworthy program.

 

I agree.

[Transplant]

This thread has potential. Just needs a good Friday contributing factor. Can we move it to CG?

[comix4fun]

The paparazzi style SS still happens. It just tends to happen in the confines of a convention these days. Also CGC started with the ability to witness your own books and it was that way for years. Although I like the direction of the program I still think the biggest problem is the facilitators CGC has decided to align themselves with. There appear to be no ramifications for less than stellar behaviour.

 

 

If the person signing the book is already making an appearance at a comic convention for a panel, for a signing, etc. they are expecting to sign items and promote themselves....they aren't driving up to a stop light, or leaving a theater by a back door to get into a car, or coming out of a dinner. So maybe we need to define terms....maybe "Ambushing the person at a venue they were not attending to sign items" would be more appropriate.

 

CGC has eliminated most or all of the problematic aspects of the program that give rise to the most troubling appearances of impropriety, a lack of professionalism, and may cause doubt or lack of trust in the program and the label.

 

If you want to see troubling facilitators and witnesses, there are some that have aligned themselves with CBCS that are doing so seemingly because they are allowed to use tactics and methods that would get their books a green label at CGC. I wanted to give the CBCS program more credit or benefit of the doubt at the outset.

 

That being said, the stuff I've seen and read online just in the last two weeks in regards to what CBCS has allowed to be slabbed under a yellow label, makes me appreciate the CGC program even more from a stability and trust that the brand will mean something in the future.

[Transplant]

Why are we discussing CBCS? I thought this thread was about CGC's policies?

[revat]

Why are we discussing CBCS? I thought this thread was about CGC's policies?

 

I'm not sure what the mods think about discussing it, but CGC SS doesn't happen in a vacuum, and the decisions made about CGC SS don't happen in a vacuum. It would be extremely naïve to think that CGC makes decisions without considering what other companies are doing, and attempt improve and delineate themselves accordingly.

 

And it would be equally naïve to think that one could have a discussion about their feelings on changes to the program without considering how those changes compare with policies of other companies, as the 'relativeness' can play a very significant factor in our perception of the CGC policies.

 

But it does bring up a question as to whether the discussion should be had here at all, if it can't be had in its entirety because of the related CBCS discussion.

[Transplant]

Yeah. I thought the rule was no discussing CBCS at all. But the practical application is that you're allowed to bash CBCS as much as you want.

 

Frankly, I think the no-talkie-CBCS rule is a little paranoid and short-sighted.

[A-DONIS]

I have noticed that those who complain about the program have neither been involved, care about it, or take the time to educate themselves about it. Outside of the Signature Series realm of course.

 

If a Facilitator wants to use seven CAWS, as long as they're approved, what's the big deal? It's easier to get things done, and brings more volume of books to CGC.

 

Yes, collecting is a hobby but it's also a business. Fortunately for some both go hand in hand, and because of it, great friendships and business partners have been created over the years.

 

For me, personally, I will always be loyal to CGC, the program, and it's employees, some of which I've become friends with.

 

[THE_BEYONDER]

I have noticed that those who complain about the program have neither been involved, care about it, or take the time to educate themselves about it.

 

That's a pretty broad brush your using......

[comix4fun]

The paparazzi style SS still happens. It just tends to happen in the confines of a convention these days. Also CGC started with the ability to witness your own books and it was that way for years. Although I like the direction of the program I still think the biggest problem is the facilitators CGC has decided to align themselves with. There appear to be no ramifications for less than stellar behaviour.

 

 

If the person signing the book is already making an appearance at a comic convention for a panel, for a signing, etc. they are expecting to sign items and promote themselves....they aren't driving up to a stop light, or leaving a theater by a back door to get into a car, or coming out of a dinner. So maybe we need to define terms....maybe "Ambushing the person at a venue they were not attending to sign items" would be more appropriate.

 

CGC has eliminated most or all of the problematic aspects of the program that give rise to the most troubling appearances of impropriety, a lack of professionalism, and may cause doubt or lack of trust in the program and the label.

 

If you want to see troubling facilitators and witnesses, there are some that have aligned themselves with CBCS that are doing so seemingly because they are allowed to use tactics and methods that would get their books a green label at CGC. I wanted to give the CBCS program more credit or benefit of the doubt at the outset.

 

That being said, the stuff I've seen and read online just in the last two weeks in regards to what CBCS has allowed to be slabbed under a yellow label, makes me appreciate the CGC program even more from a stability and trust that the brand will mean something in the future.

 

It seems, as you suggest, that if someone "makes an appearance at a convention" then they are free game. Surprise visits behind the curtain or being approached in an elevator etc. is the program cleaner? Maybe. Is it clean? Come on now.

 

 

Are you equating getting a signature from someone who either just came from signing or was on their way to signing at a convention appearance to chasing someone down at a traffic light, just for example?

 

Those are identical on the spectrum?

[A-DONIS]

I have noticed that those who complain about the program have neither been involved, care about it, or take the time to educate themselves about it.

 

That's a pretty broad brush your using......

 

Koolaid will do that to you.

 

YOU have other options, I'm sure they'll take care of your business.

[revat]

The paparazzi style SS still happens. It just tends to happen in the confines of a convention these days. Also CGC started with the ability to witness your own books and it was that way for years. Although I like the direction of the program I still think the biggest problem is the facilitators CGC has decided to align themselves with. There appear to be no ramifications for less than stellar behaviour.

 

 

If the person signing the book is already making an appearance at a comic convention for a panel, for a signing, etc. they are expecting to sign items and promote themselves....they aren't driving up to a stop light, or leaving a theater by a back door to get into a car, or coming out of a dinner. So maybe we need to define terms....maybe "Ambushing the person at a venue they were not attending to sign items" would be more appropriate.

 

CGC has eliminated most or all of the problematic aspects of the program that give rise to the most troubling appearances of impropriety, a lack of professionalism, and may cause doubt or lack of trust in the program and the label.

 

If you want to see troubling facilitators and witnesses, there are some that have aligned themselves with CBCS that are doing so seemingly because they are allowed to use tactics and methods that would get their books a green label at CGC. I wanted to give the CBCS program more credit or benefit of the doubt at the outset.

 

That being said, the stuff I've seen and read online just in the last two weeks in regards to what CBCS has allowed to be slabbed under a yellow label, makes me appreciate the CGC program even more from a stability and trust that the brand will mean something in the future.

 

It seems, as you suggest, that if someone "makes an appearance at a convention" then they are free game. Surprise visits behind the curtain or being approached in an elevator etc. is the program cleaner? Maybe. Is it clean? Come on now.

 

 

Are you equating getting a signature from someone who either just came from signing or was on their way to signing at a convention appearance to chasing someone down at a traffic light, just for example?

 

Those are identical on the spectrum?

 

I would tend more towards equating outside a bathroom at a convention panel to waiting by the back door of a screening but whatever floats your boat.

 

I am more confused by the idea that authentication is more likely to be maintained by the current structure vs witnessing your own books. The motivation to cheat is still present. I don't see how it has even been mitigated.

 

I'm not sure you can mitigate an individual's motivations to cheat, short of paying them so much it would seem insane to cheat the system and risk losing your meal ticket (You can't even stop football players from smoking pot so that they can earn millions of dollars).

 

BUT you can put 'controls' (accounting/business term) in place to help mitigate the risk and opportunity to cheat. Not being able to witness a sig on your own book helps to mitigate (not eliminate) some of that opportunity. Its generally harder to get two people to cheat together than one, generally because they have to be deceptive people but still trust each other, not as easily done.

 

Stricter guidelines for backgrounds of employees and facilitators help mitigate risk, more and better training help mitigate risk, transparency in the process helps mitigate risk, heavier penalties for violations may curb some of the motivations.

 

But even with all of those (and more!), the motivation to will still be there (if its there). But that could be said about nearly any job in any industry, and even though some people (in every industry) will attempt to take advantage or cheat, we have to believe that the vast majority of people will generally do the right thing, the professional thing, the thing they agreed to do, at least up to the legal minimum requirements.

[A-DONIS]

I have noticed that those who complain about the program have neither been involved, care about it, or take the time to educate themselves about it.

 

That's a pretty broad brush your using......

 

Koolaid will do that to you.

 

YOU have other options, I'm sure they'll take care of your business.

 

Point missed?? Yuuup!

 

Pointless quotes? Yes!

[comix4fun]

I have noticed that those who complain about the program have neither been involved, care about it, or take the time to educate themselves about it.

 

That's a pretty broad brush your using......

 

Koolaid will do that to you.

 

YOU have other options, I'm sure they'll take care of your business.

 

Point missed?? Yuuup!

 

Pointless quotes? Yes!

 

 

 

The Yuuup! reminded me of who you were...I forgot about the name change.

[SoylentBlue]

 

If people think the program is flawless all they need to do is look back a few months to the Akoni issues. That was a huge mistake on everyone's part, Akonis, CGCs, and his fellow facilitators. Ty Salazar is doing a crazy good job taking care of that mess, but imagine if he hadn't been able to stand up and handle it.

.

 

Akoni's mistakes were his, and his alone. His facilitators, which some of us were a part of Team Eastman, were (insert derogatory word) over. To this day, none of us have been compensated.

 

His actions lead to the dismemberment of Team Eastman, and tarnished a wonderful relationship with both Kevin and Courtney.

 

 

It's hard when an A+ student, who is charismatic and well liked collector becomes an F student overnight. Rules and more rules can be applied but what rules can be applied when someone stops caring.

[Par2ch]

 

If people think the program is flawless all they need to do is look back a few months to the Akoni issues. That was a huge mistake on everyone's part, Akonis, CGCs, and his fellow facilitators. Ty Salazar is doing a crazy good job taking care of that mess, but imagine if he hadn't been able to stand up and handle it.

.

 

Akoni's mistakes were his, and his alone. His facilitators, which some of us were a part of Team Eastman, were (insert derogatory word) over. To this day, none of us have been compensated.

 

His actions lead to the dismemberment of Team Eastman, and tarnished a wonderful relationship with both Kevin and Courtney.

 

 

It's hard when an A+ student, who is charismatic and well liked collector becomes an F student overnight. Rules and more rules can be applied but what rules can be applied when someone stops caring.

 

 

Arent you supposed to be on vacation?

[A-DONIS]

 

If people think the program is flawless all they need to do is look back a few months to the Akoni issues. That was a huge mistake on everyone's part, Akonis, CGCs, and his fellow facilitators. Ty Salazar is doing a crazy good job taking care of that mess, but imagine if he hadn't been able to stand up and handle it.

.

 

Akoni's mistakes were his, and his alone. His facilitators, which some of us were a part of Team Eastman, were (insert derogatory word) over. To this day, none of us have been compensated.

 

His actions lead to the dismemberment of Team Eastman, and tarnished a wonderful relationship with both Kevin and Courtney.

 

 

 

 

It's hard when an A+ student, who is charismatic and well liked collector becomes an F student overnight. Rules and more rules can be applied but what rules can be applied when someone stops caring.

 

 

You have a point, mighty warrior. He who doesn't care, does not care about consequences.